The Effects of Hypocapnia and Hypercapnia on Intraoperative Bleeding, Surgical Field Quality, and Surgeon...

Septorhinoplasty (SRP) is one of the most commonly performed procedures in the world for functional and aesthetic purposes. The present study was aimed to compare the effects of hypocapnia and hypercapnia regarding the total amount of intraoperative bleeding, surgical field quality, and surgeon satisfaction level.

In this randomized prospective clinical study, eighty patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists I-II and were 18-45 years old scheduled for septorhinoplasty were randomly allocated to group hypocapnia [end-tidal carbon dioxide (EtCO₂) 30 ± 2 mmHg] and group hypercapnia (EtCO₂ 40 ± 2 mmHg). We evaluated the total amount of intraoperative bleeding, the surgical field quality, surgeon satisfaction level, hemodynamics and peri- and postoperative adverse events.

Group hypocapnia significantly reduced the total amount of intraoperative bleeding (p < 0.001). The surgical field quality and surgeon satisfaction level in group hypocapnia were significantly better than group hypercapnia (p < 0.001). EtCO₂ levels of group hypocapnia were significantly lower than group hypercapnia at all time points (p < 0.001 for all time points). There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of heart rate and mean arterial pressure at all time points. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of adverse events CONCLUSIONS: The results of this double-blind randomized clinical trial showed that reducing the amount of intraoperative bleeding for patients with hypocapnia undergoing SRP through known methods (e.g., reverse Trendelenburg head-up position, positive end-expiratory pressure limiting, controlled hypotension, and use of topical vasoconstrictors, corticosteroids, and tranexamic acid) would improve the quality of the surgical field and raise the surgeon satisfaction level.

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .